Re: /x/ and 'inter-Germanic' (was: Intergermansk)

Quoting "Mark J. Reed" <markjreed@...>:

> On Mon, Jan 31, 2005 at 01:23:00AM +0100, Andreas Johansson wrote:
> > Denoting a phoneme that is not pronounced as [S] as /S/ when there is a
> > separate phoneme pronounced as [S] strikes me as a terrible state of
> affairs.
>
> On behalf of English-speakers everywhere: welcome to our world!  Just
> try to find a phonemic representation of English where the symbol you
> choose for some phoneme X doesn't turn out to be an allophone of phoneme
> Y in someone else's 'lect . . .
Thing is, in my case it would not be at all difficult to avoid it. To the very
best of my knowledge, in Swedish [x] only occurs as the 'sj' phoneme, so
denoting it as /x/ would be safe. For 'tj', tradition says /C/ - [C], far as I
know doesn't occur at all. Moreover, the English phonemicization could, if
sensibly designed, offer some consolation by reflecting the phonetic reality of
some important lect. Few if any native speakers of Swedish use [S] for 'sj'.

                                                            Andreas